What Sociologist's Have Understood The Family To Be

Because family patterns have been created through ideologies and social processes, there has been great diversity across human societies as to the meaning of Family. From foraging economies, to peasant farmers, to our industrialized capitalist society; family life has been forever changing. Family life has been characterized by our geographic, social economic and political differences, thus, the cross-cultural and historical variations in our family patterns. There have been great discussions and many writings on what 'The Family' is. The following is a short summary of these views.
After the 1950's, the beginning of social science, there continued to be many differing views.
As time has changed so has the definition of family, which is now seen as a unit bounded biologically, but legally defined, with shelter, love and self-sufficiency. This kind of family is seen to emerge in complex state-governed societies. Family is a moral, cultural, ideological (set of symbols) unit, and is seen as forever changing and a product of the different social orders in which it emerges.
The kind of families we live in are infinitely varied, and are guided by our ideological views, social processes, and social relations. The family's symbolic opposition to work and business, or the market relations of capitalism, gives shape to the concept of family; by desiring a certain kind of relationship within the family, such as:
Familism is an ideology that also characterizes western capitalist societies, and sees the nuclear family as universal and necessary; the family as a set of ideas.

Included in family, are social relationships with special emotional significance. As an example, gays and lesbians. Family is known to them through:
Family would also include individuals who:
It would include individuals who are involved in the same dependency and daily caring relationships as married people sharing a dwelling. If these families were legally considered a family, our public policies would then support these people too; in their loving relationships, their rights to same tax deductions, inheritance rights, medical decisions...

There has been a definite correlation in historical changes with the organization of production (work) and reproduction (child bearing and rearing).

Within foraging economies scarce resources were shared, and decisions and child rearing were collectively made. Since there was no inheritance to share, there was no social concern over legitimacy of children, nor control on women's sexuality - thus fewer number of births.

While with the peasant farmers, the households were the organizing center for economic production. They had much wealth in terms of property, and their inheritance was a major concern. Thus, children were defined as legitimate heirs. As a result women had more children, and their work was closely tied to child rearing. There were powerful social controls on women's sexuality.

Within the capitalist society the number of children per woman is low and declining. These changes are due to the incompatibility of waged work, and domestic responsabilities (child care, emotional care, ...), not having the inheritance to pass on... Parent's are thereby trying to give their children the emotional and educational support necessary to survive their generation.

The home has changed from a place of work and family life, to a place of family life and refuge from external pressures. The home is now exclusively to relax, and take care of children. Work has become external. Thus the private versus the public (state regulated).


REFERENCES